Read the Bible: regardless of your beliefs

M

mikenostic

Stop pretending you're smart!
Registered Senior Member
http://www.slate.com/id/2212616/?gt1=38001

Very interesting article.
Even though I'm agnostic like the author, I share his belief in reading the bible regardless of your beliefs. Read it in the same fashion you would read any other book of information.

What does that tell you when an agnostic reads the bible from cover to cover and becomes more skeptical?
 
Not to sound like a theocratic crank, but I'm actually shocked that students aren't compelled to read huge chunks of the Bible in high school and college, the way they must read Shakespeare or the Constitution or Mark Twain.
Click to expand...

Well... for my degree, the bible was a requirement to learn. My specialty is medieval Europe, so knowing the bible is essential to understanding the social milieu of the time.

Mind you... the author of you article does not do much with it other than just read it as a bunch of stories taken at face value. What is really interesting is where those stories come from, what they originally were and how they changed over the years. This reveals a great deal about our society now and then.
 
mikenostic said:
http://www.slate.com/id/2212616/?gt1=38001

Very interesting article.
Even though I'm agnostic like the author, I share his belief in reading the bible regardless of your beliefs. Read it in the same fashion you would read any other book of information.

What does that tell you when an agnostic reads the bible from cover to cover and becomes more skeptical?
Click to expand...
How do you think the majority of skeptics, become that way, Through studying, there own holy book and seeing the flaws.
I was myself brought up with the Qu'ran, and have studied the Bible and the Vadas also since becoming atheist, most atheists know more about religious holy books than there own adherents. It would be extremely foolish to discuss a subject without having a reasonably good knowledge of said subject.
 
It's actually one of the best pieces of information for history(from the Hebrew perspective of course ).
 
mikenostic said:
Very interesting article.
Even though I'm agnostic like the author, I share his belief in reading the bible regardless of your beliefs. Read it in the same fashion you would read any other book of information.

What does that tell you when an agnostic reads the bible from cover to cover and becomes more skeptical?
Click to expand...

How can an agnostic become even more skeptical?
 
Signal said:
How can an agnostic become even more skeptical?
Click to expand...
By reading the bible.
:roflmao:

Actually not really.
Click to expand...
So the bible has no historical value, nor can it be verified by any other actual, official historical documents?
I guess that means we can start filing that book in the fiction section then.
 
I guess you need to know what it was like before modern archaeology, which has point by point found people and places talked about in the Hebrew Torah, that previously people had no memory or knowledge of.

It's a good Historical document exactly because there are few surviving other documents from the time. Good for reference, cross reference. Perhaps not as much anymore as modern archaeology has uncovered more and more to work with.
 
nietzschefan said:
I guess you need to know what it was like before modern archaeology, which has point by point found people and places talked about in the Hebrew Torah, that previously people had no memory or knowledge of.

It's a good Historical document exactly because there are few surviving other documents from the time. Good for reference, cross reference. Perhaps not as much anymore as modern archaeology has uncovered more and more to work with.
Click to expand...


That's what I was thinking. Modern technology is chipping away bit by bit in disproving the older religions, yet most Christians sit there and deny it more vehemently than Baghdad Bob denied U.S. forces were in the country.
 
Well yes indeed, for instance Archaeology has proved that the Hebrew religion is actually 3 places removed from Sumerian Mythology (and copies the original ohh so many ways). Really just a hand-me-down religion like any other.

It was probably an exciting time for bible thumpers until they started digs in Mesopotamia.
 
So the bible has no historical value, nor can it be verified by any other actual, official historical documents?
I guess that means we can start filing that book in the fiction section then.
Click to expand...
That would be reasonable, yes.

Although if you read the book in the King James version, and read Shakespeare alongside it, it's worthwhile. Fiction has great value, or some of it anyway.
 
You are very wrong in saying that the Bible has no historical value.

1. The Bible includes a huge amount of day to day information. How people lived, ate, etc. There is little from the period that can tell us that other than the bible. Since such details would have not have been important enough to change for religious or political reasons, we have every reason to believe they are likely genuine.

2. The Bible has had a marked influence on history as a whole. Much of the latter Roman political concerns are directly influenced by it. In the Middle Ages, some forms of formal logic were directly based on it. It's influence on medieval thought and society is immense. Understanding the Bible is a requisite for any medieval scholar. In my case, knowing both the Bible and the Koran was a requirement.

3. Much like the Iliad and the Odyssey were for Heinrich Schliemann, the Bible is a great tool for archeology. It allows an archeologist or historian a place to begin searching for evidence. There is a huge amount of information that has been uncovered based on the Biblical accounts. Some of it supports what the Bible says.. some of it invalidates it. In both cases this is information that we would not have found without the Bible as a source.
 
rob said:
You are very wrong in saying that the Bible has no historical value.
Click to expand...
I didn't say that.

I said it was a work of fiction.

As a work of fiction, especially in the King James version, it has a great deal of value - some of it historical. As does, you mention, the Odyssey, and one might add the Norse Eddas, the Mabinogion, the Tale of Genji, Beowulf, the Bhagavad Gita, and so forth.
 
2. The Bible has had a marked influence on history as a whole. Much of the latter Roman political concerns are directly influenced by it. In the Middle Ages, some forms of formal logic were directly based on it. It's influence on medieval thought and society is immense. Understanding the Bible is a requisite for any medieval scholar. In my case, knowing both the Bible and the Koran was a requirement.
Click to expand...
If you have half a brain in your head, you should know that history can be forged, skewed and altered to suit whoever was in charge at the time.
The bible is no different.
 
RobDegraves said:
You are very wrong in saying that the Bible has no historical value.
Click to expand...
not really

1. The Bible includes a huge amount of day to day information.
Click to expand...
none of which is reliable

There is little from the period that can tell us that other than the bible.
Click to expand...
except for actual letters and documents from real people.

2. The Bible has had a marked influence on history as a whole.
Click to expand...

So did dirt but there isn't any need to wallow in it.

3. Much like the Iliad and the Odyssey were for Heinrich Schliemann, the Bible is a great tool for archeology.
Click to expand...
its ok for an unreliable Tertiary source.

Bottom line - its just not that interesting or reliable. Ivanhoe has better fact checking.
 
mikenostic said:
By reading the bible.
:roflmao:
Click to expand...

How can an agnostic become even more skeptical?

An agnostic is already as skeptical as it is possible to be.

If a person read the Bible and then became 'even more skeptical', then this is indicative that the person has not started out as an agnostic,
but already had some particular position on the topics discussed in the Bible.

An agnostic cannot be moved one way or another; unless he first gives up his agnosticism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top